OrgCode – What’s Next?
If you have been paying attention in social media, you know that I have added onto the OrgCode team as of late. Jeff, Tracy and yours truly remain the core employees. We will still have one or more interns pretty much all the time. But on top of that, I am super grateful we have been able to get some top tier talent to devote some time to OrgCode. Let me tell you why.
I am the face of OrgCode. I get that. But I am not OrgCode. If we really want to penetrate the organizational DNA to make change happen (which is where the name “OrgCode” came from originally), we need a range of talents beyond just what I offer.
Zach Brown, Amanda Sisson, Mike Shore, Kris Freed, and Erin Wixsten are exceptional people. They all know OrgCode. All have cool, established day jobs. And they give OrgCode things it does not have, as well as make some of the things we do have better. In this arrangement we gain expertise in landlords, housing authorities, families, data systems, youth, rural, housing operations, LGBTQ, rapid rehousing, strategic planning, and training.
For two days later this week we are holed up together in Toronto to plan our next steps together. I can promise you this:
we will be creating new products and updating some existing OrgCode products
the website is going through an overhaul
we will be determining how best to provide training, where and for what purpose
the Leadership work will continue
we will better articulate the projects we want to be involved with, and why
I am excited for the next chapter of what this all means. This work has always been about making change, not making money. This newest incarnation of who we are pushes us further into the realm of making meaningful impact.
Stay tuned.
Designing an Amazing Emergency Shelter
Howdy!
If you are at the National Alliance to End Homelessness conference this week in DC you may have been in or heard about the session that Cynthia Nagendra and yours truly delivered on Designing an Amazing Emergency Shelter. Whether at the conference or not, I wanted you to get access to some generic policies and procedures that you can use in crafting your trauma-informed, housing-focused shelter. Note that these policies and procedures were first developed for a men’s shelter. You may have to adjust things like population group(s) to be served, access hours, meals, etc. But this should give you something to work off of to get you started in updating, revising or creating your shelter policies.
Follow the link here to download.
Before That Winter Shelter Gets Into Full Swing, Read This
I grew up in Northern Ontario. I understand winter cold. I know first hand the piercing pain of a northern wind sweeping across Lake Superior and taking the breath from you. My brother and I used to have to shovel our driveway and we would describe the degree of cold outside of whether or not snot would freeze when you breathed in deep. And just to make my cold weather credentials (and hoser-esque Canadiana) even more well known, we heated our house with wood, so I know what it is like to be in the middle of the night in a frozen abode until more logs got on the fire. I hate the cold. I know winter is a heartless bastard. I wish winter did not happen, and the more I travel to places like Florida, Southern California and Hawai’i, the more I realize how smart people are for living there.
So knowing the pain of cold, why is it that I am not a huge fan of winter shelter? In a nutshell, it is because people are making an emotional decision on how to address homelessness, not one driven by data. I have felt this way in my reading and research for the past decade or so. Then two events over the past week or so have solidified my opinion further.
In one instance, I was in the Region of Waterloo, Ontario for their community forum on homelessness on September 25, 2015. They presented data on the winter response to homelessness historically and over the past year as they have phased out their winter response. What the data clearly showed is that the regular shelter system could absorb the impacts of a winter shelter, and that many of the people that had been using the winter shelter were merely moving from the “regular” shelter to the winter shelter – it was not a huge population of otherwise unsheltered people making use of the winter shelter. Then on September 28, 2015 I had the pleasure of hearing Dr. O’Connell speak again in New Hampshire where he presented even more data that has me convinced now more than ever before that the push to enhance shelter options in the winter is not going to do the things that people thinks it does. What kills people that live outdoors in places like northern states and Canada isn’t hypothermia. Even when we have experienced things like the polar vortex in recent years, extreme cold weather has injured people, but it does not kill them on mass. Instead, what is killing people living outside on mass are things like cancer and heart disease. To paraphrase Dr. O’Connell and his research, these are the things brought about from years of hard living, not from being exposed to the elements. And lest you think that the winter shelter is preventing injury related to things like frostbite, there was some compelling images shared by Dr. O’Connell proving that those folks are staying outside and not even accessing winter shelter.
To me, it begs several questions that I think must be considered locally before you put out a whack of money into a winter shelter, and rally volunteers and a community response at a large scale:
If the issue is one of shelter space, shouldn’t your community have adequate shelter space year round, and not just the winter?
If you are concerned about health and welfare, why not invest more in preventative and routine health care, as well as home health care for people that move from homelessness into housing?
Is the matter really one of sensationalized media attention and knee jerk policy response rather than thoughtful analysis and planning? While one person that is homeless dying from exposure is too many, is that one person’s life worth more than the 30 that died from cancer or heart disease?
In many communities more people that are homeless die from violence and other disease in the summer than hypothermia in the winter, so why are we not doing more in the summer?
If the people that are using winter shelter generally are NOT the completely street entrenched population, but rather are episodic and other shelter users, are you actually designing a response for the population you think is served by your response?
With so many winter responses being facilities that were not designed to be shelter, have you thought through the ramifications of providing accommodation in a setting where you are more likely to be spreading communicable disease because of insufficient air turnover and cots/mats that are in close proximity to one another?
Is your winter shelter part of the professional shelter response in your community – or do you run it through well intentioned faith groups and volunteers? Is the quality of service of your winter response at least equal to the quality of service provided in other shelters?
If your winter response was to assist those that you perceive as the most vulnerable, could the same money and staffing been used to house and support these individuals rather than providing them temporary housing?
What is the outcome that you intend to achieve with your winter shelter…what difference does it really make at the end of the day? (Compared to what difference you think it makes.)
How does a bandaid measure of a winter response fit into your pursuit of ending homelessness?
Think about it.
The Leadership Academy Happens This Week
This week, in West Virginia, about 200 leaders in ending homelessness are coming together to participate in the first ever OrgCode Leadership Academy. I am humbled by how many people have made the commitment to be at the Academy. I said we would do the Academy if there were 40 people interested in it – and it turns out more than five times that were interested if you include the waiting list.
I decided to do the Leadership Academy because there were so many people that I have encountered in my travels that had leadership questions rather than technical questions about service provision. I really have no idea what is going to happen this week other than I have worked harder at this than any other thing I have worked on in years, other than SPDAT.
I could fail this week. That is entirely possible. I will make mistakes this week. For sure, that is going to happen. I am going to take the risk this week, because it is worth it.
More important than anything I say or share this week is the networking that is going to happen amongst the leaders in attendance. There are leaders from Canada and the United States. There are leaders in government, non-profits, faith groups, and the private sector. There are leaders at the top of their organization and middle of their organization. There are leaders that are early on in their career and those approaching the twilight of their career. And they are all coming together.
Stay tuned for the post-mortem on how it all turns out. If you are going to be there, I look forward to seeing you. If you are not there and reading the blog, send us your positive vibes.
I Give Thanks
Today is Thanksgiving in Canada. To my good friends south of the border: yes we eat turkey, and watch football (Monday Night Football…or the Canadian Football League), and hang out with relatives – some of whom we legitimately like.
Kidding aside, here is a short list of what I am thankful for this year:
a) My wife. She is the rock on whom the foundation of OrgCode is built. Without her, I would not be able to travel every week and do the things I do. I love her for always. And she gave birth to our fourth child this year. I hope we do not need to create an intergenerational business of ending homelessness, but there are four replacements for me if things go that way.
b) What I get to do for a living. This is my passion. It is my vocation. The privilege of making a difference and doing what I love is not lost on me. I will never be rich. Somedays I am frustrated. But overall, I am happy.
c) My health. Maybe it is age, but the older I get the more things my doctor tells me to watch or is wrong with me. It is frustrating. I am trying to take care of myself to keep on trucking. I am grateful that I am healthy in a manner to keep this pace. I am especially thankful that my mental health has been well for some time.
d) The people I work with. I love my team. Maybe you know them and maybe you don’t. I know that I am frequently the face of OrgCode. Tracy checks in on my work-life balance and how I am doing. Jeff occasionally slips into friend mode to ask me how I am doing with my overall wellness and mental health. Katie is bringing new energy and joy to the team. Even when some of the OrgCode staff have changed (I still miss Gwen, Kieran and Ali, for example) I am grateful that amazing people want to be with me for the ride in ending homelessness.
e) My truck. I am not one for possessions or things. Except my truck. I LOVE my truck. I only get to drive it on Saturday usually, so the gas guzzling, environment destroying machine is used sparingly (this is a good thing).
f) People that inspire me. There are some organizations and people that I meet on the road that light the fire within me to keep striving to do more, to challenge myself, and to never surrender in the pursuit of being awesome.
g) The chance to teach. For more than a decade I have had the privilege or inspiring minds and sharing knowledge with Graduate Students at York University. What many of my students do not know is that they inspire me to learn and get better and stay on top of main currents of thought and practice in the field.
h) Reading. This is a recent thing I am thankful for, as I have been topping up my knowledge base heading into the leadership academy. Since the summer I have read more than a dozen books I have been wanting to read for some time. I am also committing to doing that more.
i) The blog. Once upon a time I toyed with the idea of writing a blog. I consulted with other bloggers. They encouraged me to go ahead and gave me some tips. Now? Well, in my travels and introductions to speaking engagements people frequently mention the blog. I guess it has an impact. I am glad to write it, but more glad that you read it.
Thanks for being you. Thanks for reading.
Measuring a Functional End to Homelessness
It is no easy task to measure an end to something as fluid and dynamic as homelessness. I am not writing this blog to critique approaches that have been suggested by others. Instead my focus is to add my voice on considerations and approaches that communities may want to contemplate to truly declare “Functional Zero”.
Focus on outcomes, not outputs.
An output measures the volume of an activity. An outcome is the measurement of what difference any of it makes. If you are focused on outcomes, the system changes WHILE the program participants are getting housed. With veterans I would expect, for example, different outcomes related to transitional housing and GPD programs than what they currently are because of the focus on permanent housing. With chronic homelessness, for example, I would expect a change in community policing and engagement with people living outdoors. These are just a couple of examples amongst many that are possible.
The difference of any program focused on housing should be not just that people get housed (really important) but also that people stay housed (though maybe not in the same place they were first housed). Housing retention rates (preferably by acuity) are a good measure, especially if we can track changes in acuity post-housing.
Don’t blame the service participant; examine the service provider.
Noting an offer of service is good insofar as it tells us something about whether people are engaged by outreach or other service providers. What it does not tell us is if the proper service is being offered. I would suggest that we need to know HOW service providers are adjusting their services and service offers to best meet the needs of people that are in need of services. Think of it this way:
The manager of the restaurant asks his server, “Did you go to their table?”
And the server replies, “Many times.”
The manager asks, “Did they get what they came here for?”
And the server replies, “I offered them drinks each time and they kept saying ‘no’.”
So the manager inquires, “Did you offer to make them the drink of their choice? Did you offer them the dinner menu with water? Did you see if they were here just for dessert.”
And the server replies, “You just said we needed to check in on our tables. You didn’t say we had to cater what we offer to give them what they need.”
Measure fidelity to a specific type of evidence-informed support model.
If your community has an ACT program to assist with service provision, then you can measure fidelity to the ACT model. If your community is using an ICM program to assist with service provision, the you can measure fidelity to an ICM model. These are well established and will tell you if service providers are doing what is necessary to provide supports necessary to keep people housed in alignment with the main currents of thought and practice, as evaluated and published.
The assumption here is that an evidence-informed model of support is being used in your community to end homelessness. If it is not, then that probably raises bigger flags – especially if you are trying to measure an end to homelessness.
Focus on what you know you know, while respecting there are some things that you don’t know you don’t know.
A presumption and preference of knowing each person or family experiencing homelessness by name is a very good thing. But there is a huge (flawed) assumption in that, which is there is a mechanism to be all-knowing in real time.
There are things we know we know. There are things we know we do not know. There are things we do not know that we do not know.
To the best that your resources allow and to which people engage with you, you may have a voluntary list of persons that want services from you. That is a great thing. Do not assume, however, that it is 100% representational of what is happening in your community.
Measure the things you control, and not the things you do not.
Outcome measurement should be limited to the impact of resources that are directly within your control to influence. For example, considered a VA funded program that requires the person to be anything other than dishonorably discharged to be eligible. Measuring an end to veteran homelessness, therefore, may want to include people that were, say, dishonorably discharged, but the VA does not control those resources. Therefore, it is impossible and inappropriate for the VA to prefer or compel a non-VA resource to help out a veteran that was dishonorably discharged. Consider my restaurant example again:
“I sent the couple to Murphy’s next door because they did not meet our dress code” says the maitre’d to the manager.
“Very well,” says the manager, “but please go next door and make sure Murphy’s served them well.”
“But we do not own or manage Murphy’s,” says the maitre’d.
“Yes,” says the manager, “but they should serve them because we cannot.”
And what would we expect? That Murphy’s served the couple? That they would give up a table that could have served other patrons because the restaurant next door – that does not own or manage them – sent the couple over? Is that in the other restaurant’s best interest?
Decrease variation. Always.
If we are going to measure an end to homelessness there will be local circumstances that influence efforts (for example: vacancy rates, fair market rent, etc.). However, the more we suggest there can be variation rather than standardizing based upon certain characteristics, the more flawed the measurement. If we are going to benchmark, what prevents stating something like, “In markets where the vacancy rate is 2.5% or below and the fair market rent for a one-bedroom unit is $800 or above, the average length of homelessness should not exceed x.”
If it is politically driven in picking the date of when homelessness has been ended or declaring functional zero for veterans happens on or near Veterans Day, call bullshit.
The great thing about measurement driven by data is that it is independent of political interference. There is absolutely no need to figure out when an end to homelessness fits into a Mayor’s “messaging cycle”. Functional zero happens when functional zero happens. Not when it is convenient.
Which leads me to Veterans Day proclamations. Mark my words: this will be the year when dozens of communities declare an end to homelessness amongst veterans on or near November 11. Just too big of a convenience. It is hogging the spotlight on a day when the media spotlight is conveniently focused on the issues of veterans.
Measure the right things. In the right way. Do it at the right time. Measure it with integrity. If the lives of people experiencing homelessness were important enough to you to house and support them in the first place, surely they are important enough to measure the progress of that goal in a way that respects them.